Analysis How the state of the game has evolved, is the increased rate of injuries a result of of the evolution

[Ron The Bear]

EFA
You are welcome.

That's part of it, but entire teams moving en masse depending on where the ball is killed positional play and reduced contests. Interchange merely enables teams to do it more effectively and makes it more of a burst sport along the lines of NFL.

"Swans coach Paul Roos has branded a proposal to cut the number of interchanges next year ludicrous..."

 

[This Is Anfield]

The game is in a fantastic state at the moment... how can it not be when Richmond are the reigning premiers!!

 

[Johnny_Dogg4]

i hate the current rules.
its like every contest you expect free kicks.

and the constant talk of OTT rule changes (zones etc.)

surprisingly the best footy to watch is wet weather footy.

 

[CholEstrol]

Pretty sure Eade was the flood pioneer 90's and Roos

The game has been in decline as a spectacle since the mid-2000's. Paul Roos has a lot to answer for.

you could go back further to Eade as far as being answerable.

 

[iluvparis]

Good post. You can't eliminate the bench, that's just ridiculous. The amount of injuries would be insane. There would literally be deaths due to cardiac arrest. I'm assuming they mean the amount of rotations.

There certainly were some shit football during the 90's but the key word is football.

Lol - like all those deaths that occurred for the 80 or so years there was subs instead of interchange?

 

[Cincinnatus]

I suspect you won’t be convinced till the Swans and GWS pull combined crowds and membership bigger than combined crowds and membership of all NSW NRL clubs.

Like I said, there a long way to go, but it’s catastrophising just a little to say there been “almost no progress”.

What are participation numbers at the junior level between the codes?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

What are participation numbers at the junior level between the codes?

Dunno, but I’m sure someone can tell us.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

The game has been in decline as a spectacle since the mid-2000's. Paul Roos has a lot to answer for.

His gameplan DID give us two of the best grand finals of the modern era.

 

[Cincinnatus]

Dunno, but I’m sure someone can tell us.

Fair enough. That for me has always been one of the best gauges of where a sport is at. It's one thing to tune into a final but its another to turn up every Saturday morning to watch your kid play a sport and out of all the options it being that one in particular.

 

[Ron The Bear]

His gameplan DID give us two of the best grand finals of the modern era.

The two most intense contests, perhaps. Chris Scott said recently they were crap games. Roos clogged up space and begat Ross Lyon.

But I'm not really a purist. In the end he was just doing his job, pushing the envelope in a quirky game.

While Terry Wallace was coaching Richmond he spoke a few times of the responsibility of the coaches to promote the game's aesthetics. But no club (and few supporters) would turn down a premiership at the expense of how it looks. Tough, uncompromising football wins finals; there haven't been many exceptions.

 

[Dirty_banchez]

I find every game boring these days. Every contest you wait for the whistle and then you hear the stupid umpire try and get his 15 minutes of fame.

The game is too sanitised these days. There are no villains.

The rules suck and now the AFL wants to make everything about them with changing the trade rules and draft rules.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

The two most intense contests, perhaps. Chris Scott said recently they were crap games. Roos clogged up space and begat Ross Lyon.

But I'm not really a purist. In the end he was just doing his job, pushing the envelope in a quirky game.

Look, I prefer an aesthetically-pleasing contest too, but really, as this thread suggests, there’s only so much that can be done to effect that.

The ideal match has some spectacular skills and is also a nail-biting contest, but given you can’t often get both, if you have to choose one I’ll take the nail-biter every time.

 

[Football Tragic]

I find this thread a little contradictory. Let's be honest here. If you're on this forum you LOVE footy otherwise you wouldn't waste your time and effort going to a website and discussing a game you are disillusioned with or outright dislike.

I think what people are really saying on this thread is that they dislike the way their team is performing atm

 

[Ablett2Garland]

Highlights is all any sport uses to sell itself. NFL is gaining popularity worldwide and 90% of any game is void of anything remotely entertaining.
Our game has the greatest highlights package of any sport on Earth. That's all that matters. I'd argue our highlights happen more frequently also. Most games contain multiple spectacular moments. Basketball may be the only comparative ball sport due it's similar pace, structure and high scoring.

Wrong!

 

[Ron The Bear]

Look, I prefer an aesthetically-pleasing contest too, but really, as this thread suggests, there’s only so much that can be done to effect that.

But players have flair and risk-taking drilled out of them. Follow the campaign rules or risk losing your spot in the team.

"Fantasy footy" has been a boon to the AFL. I know I'd watch fewer games without it.

I find this thread a little contradictory. Let's be honest here. If you're on this forum you LOVE footy otherwise you wouldn't waste your time and effort going to a website and discussing a game you are disillusioned with or outright dislike.

I think what people are really saying on this thread is that they dislike the way their team is performing atm

Supporters of bottom sides are often the game's most vocal critics. I love that Richmond is the best or one of the best exponents of the game right now, but I'm commenting objectively on the spectacle. When I was a kid, win or lose, no Saturday was complete without Michael Roach hauling down a screamer.

The coaches have made it all about the W, and supporters have followed suit.

 

[shaqsuns]

I couldn’t care less if the suns win the next 15 spoons (most likely to happen) however I don’t think I can’t sit through too many more games that is just an congested handball fest in which every player is in the same part of the ground. I don’t know how it doesn’t frustrate people when a player gets a mark on the half back flank but he has to slow the play down then kick backwards because there’s no teammates in front of the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NoobPie]

I couldn’t care less if the suns win the next 15 spoons (most likely to happen) however I don’t think I can’t sit through too many more games that is just an congested handball fest in which every player is in the same part of the ground. I don’t know how it doesn’t frustrate people when a player gets a mark on the half back flank but he has to slow the play down then kick backwards because there’s no teammates in front of the ball.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You've convinced me. The Suns at their peak when football was peaking in the 90s were caviar and champagne. I commend you for hanging in there so long

 

[deltablues]

The root cause of all of this is the AFLs neglect of grass roots footy across the country.

There simply isnt an oversupply of talent to justify the amount of teams.

I think 20 (2 conferences) is the right number for the sport to be honest and the solution isnt to reduce the number of teams, it shoyld be to increase the talent pool.

Football in Tasmania is dying. If Tasmania gets an ALeague licence AFL will be dead. AFL has made almost no progress in Qld and NSW so is losing out to rugby and soccer still.

WA and more particularly, SA governments are broke and the AFL rather than doing anything to help the local game would rather just tell the clubs to lobby the government for money they dont have. Less and less talent is coming from SA and WA.

NT is a source of untapped talent thanks mostly to the AFL turning a blind eye to any indigenous player that isnt a small crumbing forward they can put on a highlight reel.

The problem is is that there is a huge pressure on Victoria to churn out the overwhelming majority of talent which is being spread across 18 teams.

Soccer is the highest participation sport in the country, the AFL have just let that happen and seem to only care about the top tier level.

Add to that the evolution of the game into being one where fast and fit is the trump quality (unless you play for the crows) and you see a further dilution of skills at the top level.

The most ridiculous thing is that the AFL want to grow international when they don't even have it right domestically.

Indeed. And your comments shine a light on the elephant in the room. If you asked the question - what would be the worst plan to start a national league, the answer would be - oh, let's expand the VFL. And guess what - that happened.

Thus structurally the AFL was born misshapen - it is the VFL redux with all of the heritage Vic VFL teams, plus the Potemkin village "interstate" teams grafted on.

The mere fact that folk still use the i-word in what purports to be a national league says it all.

It would have been best by far to have structured a genuine national league as a greenfields project, but that was never likely with Victoria being the epicenter of the game, in all material respects. Not a criticism of Victoria/VFL - it's just how it was.

The AFL as an NPO has, partly due to the above structure, a significant conflict of interest. The AFL imo has gotten way ahead of itself re the overall game and grassroots culture of Aussie Rules per se .

But from the AFL's perspective of where the AFL is going, AFL-wise, it is like so totally on target/on message. In its own bureaucratic mind.

Follow the money.

 

[NoobPie]

It would have been best by far to have structured a genuine national league as a greenfields project, but that was never likely with Victoria being the epicenter of the game, in all material respects. Not a criticism of Victoria/VFL - it's just how it was.
.

Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "greenfields project"?

In the purist use of the term you might mean some startup franchise league. I would have thought that would have been one of sports biggest flops. Ironically it would have been a greenfields project on a brownfields building site

A less pure application of the term you might have meant that they should have created a new league where existing clubs from around the country were invited to apply? In theory this might have been a goer but never really a possibility.

I think the one we've got, or something similar,was an inevitability and has been a resounding success. You say it was "born misshapen" but in fact it was actually just evolution. In one year, 1987, two teams were added. The other 5 new teams were sporadically over the following quarter of a century. The one old football club worthy, Port Adelaide, is now in the AFL. The rest were top down clubs either created by the two other major state leagues or, most recently, by the AFL itself. From a distance it seems like Perth and Adelaide are cities that revolve around their two AFL clubs. Again, it seems like the evolution of the AFL overall has been a resounding success

 

[Robbie4PM]

Athletes over skill at the moment. Hopefully that eventually swings back but I think there would have to be rule changes. It's pretty embarrassing that you can go out and watch amateur players with a higher skill level than AFL players.

Most frustrating part of the game is the inconsistency of umpiring. Even watching games as a neutral is infuriating.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Indeed. And your comments shine a light on the elephant in the room. If you asked the question - what would be the worst plan to start a national league, the answer would be - oh, let's expand the VFL. And guess what - that happened.

Thus structurally the AFL was born misshapen - it is the VFL redux with all of the heritage Vic VFL teams, plus the Potemkin village "interstate" teams grafted on.

The mere fact that folk still use the i-word in what purports to be a national league says it all.

It would have been best by far to have structured a genuine national league as a greenfields project, but that was never likely with Victoria being the epicenter of the game, in all material respects. Not a criticism of Victoria/VFL - it's just how it was.

The AFL as an NPO has, partly due to the above structure, a significant conflict of interest. The AFL imo has gotten way ahead of itself re the overall game and grassroots culture of Aussie Rules per se .

But from the AFL's perspective of where the AFL is going, AFL-wise, it is like so totally on target/on message. In its own bureaucratic mind.

Follow the money.

Don’t disagree, but on the other hand, how many truly successful, truly national elite leagues do we have in this country anyway?

A-League is (reasonably) national but not very successful.

NRL is successful but not very national.

 

[Damon_3388]

I don’t like the fact that it’s moving away from strength/contest to a uncontested running game with whoever applies the most pressure wins.
Players like Sam Mitchell would have a really hard time being drafted these days, and stick figures/ Ethiopian running machines like billy hartung and Zac Guthrie are playing best 22 then it has swung too far in my opinion.
Simplify the rules and bring back the physical contest.

Lol, contested ball-winning ability is more necessary than ever. Difference now is that it's more about positioning and technique than brute strength and aggression.

 

[Damon_3388]

Don’t disagree, but on the other hand, how many truly successful, truly national elite leagues do we have in this country anyway?

A-League is (reasonably) national but not very successful.

NRL is successful but not very national.

The A-League is arguably more successful than the NRL.

 

[Damon_3388]

It's easily fixed, remove the bench and only have 'subs'. If you come off you are done for the day. Players will get tired and players get slower when they are tired but not shorter. It will encourage forwards to spend more time in the 50.

FFS, how will this improve skills and decision-making?

It's a dumb, illogical "solution" every time it's presented.

Players in the pre-interchange era didn't have to deal with 1/4 of the tackling pressure, and nowhere near the sophistication of team defense, when disposing of the ball. There wasn't the expectation that they hit a target with every disposal, either. Their skills weren't better, it was a different game.

Players and teams aren't going to go away from defensive structures that work. If they're tired, they'll probably just hang back more so as not to be scored against. It certainly won't result in a more skillful, highr scoring contest.

 

[Damon_3388]

That's what happens when athletes are drafted instead of skilled football players.

Examples of this happening in the last five years, inside the National Draft?